Hello,
Anyone to identify this Souval RS destroyer badge please ?
Thank you !
Anyone to identify this Souval RS destroyer badge please ?
Thank you !
-
-
Appears to be a good "wartime compatible" Destroyer Badge by Rudolf Souval. I have righted the pictures for ease of viewing.
Best regards,
TomMihi libertas necessest! -
Here is one that I have for comparison:
Best regards,
TomMihi libertas necessest!Comment
-
It's not quite right for the "wartime-compatible" description, in my opinion. When you compare it closely side-by-side with "wartime compatible" examples (like Tom's DC# 6.9.3 or an example of DC# 6.9.2 shown below), you can see that the pin is too short and has a different point on the end.
Souval Destroyers were cast and not die-struck originally so they always show the same surface irregularities on the reverse, but on this one the cutout behind the ship's flag looks a little small, raising the possibility of a re-casting from an original. That doesn't rule out the possibility of it still being by Souval since we see many instances where Souval/Umlauf made castings of their own badges post-war.
Whenever it was made, by Souval or not, personally I can't call this one "wartime-compatible".
Best regards,
---NormComment
-
Well, not only the cutout behind the ship's flag looks smaller but the whole badge. I wonder if it looks so on that images or it's really smaller than usual.
The main pin could be cut shorter and sharpened by the sailor also.
Cheers,
HubertComment
-
Badge mesurements :
55mm X 40mm whithout thé hull.
Badge seems very used.
Regards.Comment
-
Well, that height sounds okay (published width measurements include the hull so I can't compare there).
I guess the photo has distorted proportions - perhaps due to angling and the camera lens. If I line it up to Tom's badge and scale the lower portions the same, it ends up looking way shorter at the top.
At any rate, Souval Destroyers are relatively common, poor quality and fraught with controversy at the best of times, so you generally want one that looks fairly "classic" to add to a collection.Comment
-
-
Apologies. Showing my ignorance. What would be the name of that structure -- a crow's nest?Originally posted by John Robinson View Post
Best regards,
---NormComment
-
I do not have my books with me right now, but first, you need to look up the model of the badge, meaning which type or class.
In any case, without my destroyer book, it appears to be a platform for a radar.
JohnComment
-
It's supposed to be the type 1936-class destroyer, based upon Z21 Wilhelm Heidkamp.Originally posted by John Robinson View PostComment
-
You're absolutely right. It's the "Sumatra" radar. Sumatra is short for "Synthetic aperture Unmanned Millimeterwave Airborne Test RAdar" and is a miniaturized radar system with reduced energy consumption. In the badge design, the crow's nest (if there even was one on the Z-36 model) would have been cut off from view by the oak leaf wreath.Originally posted by John Robinson View Post
Best regards,
---NormComment
-
Paul Casberg, the designer of the Destroyer badge, obviously took some liberties with the proportions of the ship.Originally posted by Norm F View Post
Best regards,
---Norm
(Okay, I'm done hijacking Histomilifan2's thread.
)
Comment
-
Where did you find that image of the destroyer model? In any case, great work with the photographic overlays.
Interesting how close the actual destroyer was to the badge design.
As far as I know, no lookouts on the mast of any destroyer. Those work perhaps with the much higher Titanic but for low freeboard fast moving vessels like destroyers, useless.
Lookouts were posted on the bridge wings and you had the officers on watch, that was enough looking about for a destroyer.
These destroyer radars on German ships were quite the marvel for the time. Well, German naval technology upon war declaration was far ahead of other navies afloat.
What was not understood by the Germans but fully understood by the Japanese was that what was afloat was one thing, what could be built was another. Therefore explaining the attempt by the Japanese to knock out the US Navy quickly.
They correctly forecast that the US could and would build very advanced warships within 3 years of war commencement giving them only that amount of time to force peace otherwise, the war would be won by the US Navy in the Pacific.
When you see the difference between a four stacker WW1 US destroyer being chased down in the Indian Ocean by Japanese cruisers and what the US put to sea by 1944 in the form of the Fletchers, you see the issue.
By the way, a study of Japanese action reports concerning the Indian Ocean battle with the lone US destroyer gives you an idea of what was to come for the Japanese--meaning the courage of that little ship.
The Japanese sailors did not mistreat the few US survivors by the way. As usual, it was later when those US sailors were turned over to the shore sailors that the trouble began. Typical.
Image of USS Edsall crew and photo of her under attack here. The Japanese Admiral admitted in the report that it was a fiasco trying to sink that destroyer.
By the way, good flick on Netflix called "Trial" just released. About the Japanese trials after the war.
Anyway, good work Norm, lovely representations.
JohnLast edited by John R.; 01-09-2017, 09:19 AM.Comment
-
Hardly Norm. I think most collectors not completely familiar with the war badge designs of the German WW2 navy would be interested in what ship was used to represent the class of badge produced.Originally posted by Norm F View PostPaul Casberg, the designer of the Destroyer badge, obviously took some liberties with the proportions of the ship.
Best regards,
---Norm
(Okay, I'm done hijacking Histomilifan2's thread.)
I strongly recommend to collectors to buy the Kriegsmarine Awards published by Dietrich for those details.
Comment
Comment